Looking at a couple of meta questions, including my own, I have the following (Meta)^2 question:
To which extent does asking suggestive questions defeat the purpose of meta?
The point is the following: if someones wishes to substantiate that the community or majority of users supports a certain point of view, one could ask a meta question on that. However, if the OP has a certain opinion on that, they may, inadvertently or not, formulate the question in such a way that it strongly suggests some view, which will then get reflected by the answers. I am certainly not "innocent" in this regard, for instance when I wrote this post one of the aims was to get some confirmation that academic honesty is important. However, now I am no longer sure that these kinds of questions, when asked by someone with a clear opinion or agenda, are really the way to go. After all the OP can use a wording that strongly suggests something, which makes many just echo the OP's opinion, and, what is more, mark one answer as the "accepted" one, which may then suggest that this is the correct answer. This is particularly tricky when another user had a similar question before, and the new question gets closed as a duplicate. Then the choice of the first user which answer to accept will have an impact on all later related questions. My question:
Is that the purpose of meta?
How can we find out the opinions of our fellow users without, inadvertently or not, already suggesting one?
Let me stress that here I do not have any opinion and really want to learn more about the opinion of others.